On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:54:33 +0100
Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 21 March 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-03-19 at 17:15 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > > + [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> > > + device_type = "cpu";
> > > + model = "PowerPC,460GT";
> > > + reg = <0>;
> >
> > I wonder if we should do something here to differenciate the SoC chip
> > from the core. After all, all those 4xx mostly have the same core (there
> > are 2 or 3 revisions of the core maybe ...) but they tend to have all
> > different PVR which is a pain and won't scale...
> >
> > Maybe AMCC could do something in HW (splitting the PVR from whatever
> > indicates what "chip" it is, and keeping the PVR purely for the core
> > rev) but I'm wondering if we should also do something in the DTS..
> > Stefan can you talk to your AMCC contacts about this ?
>
> Yes, I'll do that. Not sure about the outcome though.
>
> > As for the DTS, maybe a "compatible" property in the CPU might make some
> > sense with a content along the lines of "ppc440x6" or whatever rev of
> > the 440 core it is.
> >
> > What do you think ?
>
> Good idea. I'll try to come up with a list for all existing 4xx SoC's and
> it's
> core versions.
I don't really care either way, but what does that buy us? Merely
documentation?
josh
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
